Google Code as an upstream is gone
Steve Kargl
sgk at troutmask.apl.washington.edu
Fri Sep 30 00:40:58 UTC 2016
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 04:33:12PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Christian Weisgerber <naddy at mips.inka.de>
> wrote:
>
> > Mathieu Arnold:
> >
> > > If the software has not been moved to some other place, (it takes about
> > > 30 seconds to click the automatic migration to github thing, and it is
> > > usually done within the hour,) since march 2015, it is most likely
> > > abandoned and should not be kept in the ports tree.
> >
> > That's a bold new policy.
> >
> > In the past, if the upstream was gone and the maintainer judged the
> > software still useful (at their discretion, not based on a cut-off
> > date), they would even fall back to providing the distfile at
> > people.freebsd.org.
> >
> > So, will this be enforced? Will somebody go through all distfiles,
> > check the time stamps in the tarballs, and mark ports as BROKEN if
> > the distfile hasn't been updated since... when exactly? I guess I
> > could to that.
> >
> > --
> > Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de
> >
>
> This was simply a terrible idea and I would hope that the ports team would
> clearly so state and back out the "BROKEN" from those ports. As others are
> pointing out, lot of very old and stable code has gone over a year without
> updating.
+1
> One case of import to me was mp4v2, a library for making MP4v2 formatted
> files.
ucpp is another example. Marked BROKEN. Broke building
of libreoffice. Just brilliant.
--
Steve
More information about the freebsd-ports
mailing list